July 28, 2004

In my sleep-deprived delirium last night, I realized that my column often veers into strange places, toward the kind of coverage offered by Ann Marie Cox, referred to as the Wonkette (from the name of her Internet site), who I have discovered is avoiding me here in Boston.

For those of you who don’t know, Ann Marie is a Washington, D.C., gossip columnist (www.wonkette.com) who I battled with on CNBC’s Capital Report last week. The thrust of her statements was that the national political conventions are theater of the absurd, and the only things worth covering are the parties and the gossip. I, of course, stated that it was important to use the coverage opportunity to reach out to younger voters based on issues important to them. The gossip coverage is what gets so many of us turned off by the political scene. Anyway, on my way to a party Monday night at Anthem, a local night spot, I heard from my sources on the ground that she was there and ready to settle this burgeoning feud. When I arrived, however, she was nowhere to be found, and there was no explanation to be had. Curious.

Ironically, as I sat in the Fleet Center last night, I better understood what she was talking about. A lot of coverage has been given to the lack of news coverage of the convention, specifically by the major broadcast networks. ABC, CBS, and NBC are only offering three prime-time hours of coverage over the entire four days, a record low.

During a crucial segment of those precious three hours of prime time network coverage Monday night, Bill Clinton defined the essence of the 2004 Democratic Party more clearly and eloquently than anyone that people in my 18-30 age group probably have had the opportunity to see. Unfortunately, not many of us saw it, according to the television ratings. Is our WWE programming so strong that it drew viewers away from Big Bill? Ratings weren’t available for RAW when this column was filed. Did RAW steal away some viewers? Maybe, but obviously the lack of eyes on Clinton’s speech indicates that people voted with their remotes to watch something else (and who can argue with an Iron Man Match between Triple H and Chris Benoit for the title?).

How could such a potentially important speech be so widely ignored?

Now that I’m here, I believe it is because the convention has become too processed (just like the Wonkette said). It’s not necessarily the theater of the absurd; it might better be termed unimaginative. When I first heard the networks weren’t providing much coverage, I was bitter that young people wouldn’t have a chance to be inspired by either party. Now that I’ve seen the product, I respect that decision. I urge you, however, not to be turned off because of the sameness of the convention television product. Whether the convention coverage is entertaining or not, there is a reason you should care about politics. Making college more affordable, for instance, is important regardless of the political parties’ ability to entertain you in prime time.

The television coverage of the convention doesn’t appeal to young people because it has fundamental flaws that can best be understood through comparisons to the sports-entertainment business. The convention on television is an entertainment product – only it’s not entertaining. Every WWE fan can recognize the convention planners stole a good deal from wrestling, but I don’t think they understand why people watch the WWE. They borrowed our Titantron, but they don’t put any brilliantly packaged videos on it to engage us. They borrowed our stage and ramp (changed to stairs), but nobody walks down it for dramatic effect. And what’s with the “elevator” entrance music? They have announcers, but the announcers don’t add any life to the show (where is JR when you need him?). The only thing missing is the ring, but they don’t need that because there is nothing to fight over.

The outcomes in wrestling are predetermined, but we don’t tell our fans who will win before the show. That would take all the fun out of the wrestlers “telling a story” and engaging the imaginations of the audience through their performances.

This convention is so ridiculously scripted, packaged, manipulated, censored, and sanitized that there is no real reason for us to care. The founding fathers must be turning in their graves.

Once, these conventions meant something. Delegates met and had four days of meetings because they were actively choosing the face of their party, its platform (what the party stands for) and the people they hoped would lead this fine country to better days. Speeches had the power to persuade the delegates and change hearts and minds. Now, listening to most of these speeches, there’s no surprise and little passion. I feel like I’m at a combination of a silly hat convention and my parents’ idea of a neighborhood backyard dance party. Don’t get me started on the sea of uniform looking printed signs passed out at strategic moments by hundreds of convention volunteers. Where is the originality that tells me someone cares? WWE fans, through their signs, proudly and creatively declare their allegiances. At the conventions, the “fans” are mere puppets of convention sign protocol.

I am even willing to make the bold prediction that the thousands of red, white, and blue balloons hanging in the rafters are going to fall on Thursday night between the hours of 9 and 11 P.M. You heard it here first.

People watch television because they want the unexpected, or at least a surprising moment. That used to happen at the political conventions. Over the last two days, I feel like I just got done watching 20 people that were given the same 30 bullet points and told to say them in the order of their choosing. Boooorrrriiiiinnnng. What I watched tonight was on par with watching paint dry, grass grow, or as Mick Foley (who’s sitting next to me and telling me incredibly funny stories) would say, as boring as watching an Al Snow match.

There have been some notable moments. On Monday, U.S, Rep. Meek gave a well-crafted speech that addressed the issues that many young voters face, and that are defined in The 18-30 VIP. The Clintons once again proved why they are tremendous communicators. Illinois U.S. Senate candidate Obama provided a truly incendiary moment Tuesday night in a speech that passionately addressed issues faced by many different groups of Americans, including 18-30’s. He had the house rocking, similar to a superb wrestling match. Teresa Heinz-Kerry introduced herself formally to the American public in a well-crafted and authentic speech.

For the most part, though, the Kerry writers have combed the convention speeches for anything that might upset their consumers – I mean voters – so there has been absolutely no element of surprise and little passion. The only drama around these speeches is to see how good the speechmakers are at reading a teleprompter.

This convention has been the greatest example of preaching to the choir that I have ever seen. If this were a training seminar for the 4,000 odd delegates on how to sell the Democratic message to potential voters over the next four months, I could understand it. If you want a sales force to commit the sales pitch to memory, making them sit in the same chair seven hours a day for four days, listening to 100 people give the same speech would be genius. But if that’s the case, why pretend to invite the rest of us? There’s nothing there to capture young people’s attention or passion. I’ll be surprised if there is any surprise lurking at the Republican convention soon to follow.

The politicians need to add much more passion, surprise, and drama to the proceedings if they want to connect with people my age. We need more new guard (like Obama and Meek), and less old guard (just about everyone else). I heard Howard Dean speak on Sunday night to a group of younger voters, and he was terrific. The Howard Dean I saw on Tuesday night was a shell of the visionary and vibrant man I’d heard just 48 hours prior.

Take off the handcuffs. I realize the party is trying to get a concise and focused message across, but I don’t know if that is necessarily the best strategic initiative, especially if they are trying to draw the disenfranchised potential voter. The conventions should maybe not worry about the 10 percent of likely voters they think are undecided, but focus more on attracting the attention of the 50 percent of the population that don’t feel like politics has anything to offer them.

It might only take one unique and inspiring speech from one unique and inspiring individual to make someone believe. If we don’t allow multiple messages and perspectives to be heard, we shrink the size of the tent. I prefer to imagine an inclusive and representative political party as having a group of people with different perspectives and experiences uniting because they believe in one candidate’s ability to include their voice, not as a bunch of people who sacrifice their personal beliefs to give the impression they are united under one common and simple message.

While that might be idealistic, we still can’t let the sanitized, manufactured feel of the televised portion of the conventions dissuade us from believing that our participation in politics can help us create a stronger and better America.

Even if the political parties aren’t giving you the impression, through television, they care about you, don’t be fooled. Behind the scenes of the non-televised, non primetime events is where the action is. I have been personally inspired just from being around the young people who will be working themselves to the bone to try to get their message to you. The passion evident in their work and their aspirations is truly representative of the significance of their, and our, goal – the inclusion of the voice of Young America.

These events are electric affairs in which people our age are proving that politics has the drama, passion, and excitement that, like a great wrestling experience, invites you to be part of the experience. Tomorrow, I’ll talk about some of these events and people. Catch my column on Thursday at noon.

Return to articles.